Supplier Quality Management
Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) Manual
February, 2009
Rev 6 Release
Cooper Industries
600 Travis
Suite 5600
Houston, TX 77002
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..............................................................................2
FOREWORD................................................................................................4
PURPOSE ...................................................................................................................... 5
WHEN IS PPAP SUBMISSION REQUIRED? ........................................................................ 5
SUPPLIER CHANGE REQUEST (SCR) INSTRUCTIONS ......................................................... 6
ELEMENTS OF A PPAP SUBMISSION ................................................................................ 7
SUBMISSION LEVELS ...................................................................................................... 8
SUPPLIER PPAP CHECKLIST .......................................................................................... 9
T
ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION/SUBMISSION METHOD ............................................................ 10
SIGNIFICANT PRODUCTION RUN .................................................................................... 10
SUBMISSION STATUS .................................................................................................... 10
ONGOING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................ 11
CRITICAL TO QUALITY (CTQ) FEATURES ........................................................................ 11
PPAP TRAINING .......................................................................................................... 12
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING A PPAP SUBMISSION.................13
ELEMENT 1 PART SUBMISSION WARRANT (PSW) ........................................................... 13
ELEMENT 2 DESIGN RECORDS AND BALLOONED DRAWINGS ............................................ 14
ELEMENT 3 APPROVED ENGINEERING CHANGE DOCUMENTATION .................................... 15
ELEMENT 4 CUSTOMER ENGINEERING APPROVALS ......................................................... 16
ELEMENT 5 DESIGN FMEA (DFMEA) ........................................................................... 16
ELEMENT 6 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMS ......................................................................... 18
ELEMENT 7 PROCESS FMEA (PFMEA)......................................................................... 19
ELEMENT 8 CONTROL PLAN .......................................................................................... 20
ELEMENT 9 MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS STUDIES (MSA) ...................................... 23
ELEMENT 10 DIMENSIONAL RESULTS ............................................................................. 25
ELEMENT 11 MATERIAL AND PERFORMANCE TEST RESULTS ........................................... 27
ELEMENT 12 INITIAL PROCESS STUDY (CPK, PPK).......................................................... 28
ELEMENT 13 QUALIFIED LABORATORY DOCUMENTATION ................................................. 33
ELEMENT 14 APPEARANCE APPROVAL REPORT.............................................................. 34
2
ELEMENT 15 SAMPLE PARTS ........................................................................................ 34
ELEMENT 16 MASTER SAMPLES .................................................................................... 35
ELEMENT 17 CHECKING AIDS ........................................................................................ 35
ELEMENT 18 COOPER SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ............................................................ 36
APPENDIX A – DEFINITIONS ..................................................................43
A – C .......................................................................................................................... 43
C - E........................................................................................................................... 44
G - O .......................................................................................................................... 45
P – S .......................................................................................................................... 46
S - T ........................................................................................................................... 48
T
APPENDIX B – CRITICAL TO QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS (CTQ) ...49
APPENDIX C – REVISION HISTORY .......................................................51
3
Foreword
The Quality Assurance staff at Cooper Industries has prepared this handbook for new
and existing suppliers of manufacturing based purchased goods to Cooper Industries.
Its purpose is to define the approval process of new or revised parts, or parts resulting
from new or significantly revised production methods. As a supplier, it is your
responsibility to ensure that you ship only parts that have been approved and meet
specifications.
The procedures outlined in this handbook apply to all Cooper
Industries facilities. If you have questions regarding the
contents or processes described in this handbook, please
contact the Quality Assurance representative of the Cooper
Industries location to which your documentation is being
submitted. Please note that Green Text in this manual will
link to the Definitions Appendix.
The requirements in this handbook were drafted to be fully
compliant with the Automotive Industry Action Groups
(AIAG) Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
standard revision 4 March, 2006. Cooper Industries has
specific customer specific requirements and additions to this
standard that need to be fully understood before attempting to successfully submit a
PPAP to Cooper Industries for review and approval.
4
Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
Purpose
The purpose of the Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) is:
9 To provide the evidence that all customer engineering design record and
specification requirements are properly understood and fulfilled by the
manufacturing organization.
9 To demonstrate that the now established manufacturing process has the
potential to produce product that consistently meets all requirements during an
actual production run at the quoted production rate.
When is PPAP Submission Required?
In general a PPAP is required anytime a new part or a change to an existing part
or process is being planned. It is at the discretion of each Cooper Industries Division
to determine when and if a PPAP submission will be required. As a supplier you
should have the type of quality system that develops all of the requirements of a
PPAP submission regardless of whether you have been asked to deliver a
submission. In the event a PPAP submission is not requested, Cooper quality
reserves the right to request any of these documents at any time during the life of
the product. Cooper Quality reserves the right to request a PPAP submission for a
variety of reasons including all of the following.
New parts, process or suppliers:
1.
New part or product
2.
New supplier
3.
New process or technology
Changes to existing product:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Change to construction, material, or component
New, additional or modified tools
Upgrade or re-arrangement of existing tools
Tooling, production, or equipment transferred to a different site
Change of supplier or non-equivalent materials/services
Product when tooling has been inactive for 12 months
Product or process changes on the components of the product
Change in test or inspection method
Bulk material: New source of raw material
Change in product appearance attributes
Change in production process or method
Change of sub-supplier or material source
5
If there are any questions concerning the need for a PPAP Submission, please
contact a Cooper Industries Quality or Supplier Quality representative.
Supplier Change Request (SCR) Instructions
Whenever you are planning a change that affects the part or the process making the
part you must get approval from Cooper prior to initiating any activity. Included in
the PPAP Forms kit is the Supplier Change Request (SCR). This document is used
for initiating all supplier changes through
all Cooper divisions. The SCR must be
approved by both Cooper Industries’
purchasing and quality. Failure to have
an approved SCR may affect future
business opportunities.
Cooper assumes a good faith agreement
with you as a supplier with respect to
change management. Therefore we rely
on the supplier to notify us in good faith
of any planned change such as
changing the location of manufacture or
changing the process that manufactures
the part supplied to Cooper. The
additional requirements section on the
form can be used to document any
additional testing, performance data or
engineering changes that may be
required to make the proposed change a
success. Any proposed change to a print requirement from a supplier should be
done using the Specification Deviation Form and follow each division’s standard
procedure for engineering changes. The SCR should not be used to suggest or
initiate print related changes. In addition, the SCR is only for changes that are
permanent in nature. Temporary changes or deviations should always follow
the Cooper manufacturing site’s process for Temporary Deviations.
The SCR identifies several “Types” of changes that require notification. These types
are covered in Table 3.1 in the most recent release of the PPAP standard. All of
these changes can have significant affect on overall part quality and are therefore
identified for customer approval prior to making the change to avoid any unforeseen
issues at Cooper facilities or with end user customers. This methodology around
change management is consistent with the Customer Notification section in the
AIAG PPAP guidelines revision 4. As a supplier to Cooper Industries you are
not under any of these circumstances allowed to make a change without prior
notification and approval of the SCR form.
6
Below is the list of Types of changes that require prior notification and
approval by Cooper Industries.
Elements of a PPAP Submission
The Cooper Industries PPAP submission requirements are compliant with the
existing AIAG standard. One or more of the following elements may be required as
part of your formal submission depending upon your assigned submission level:
1. Part Submission Warrant (Cooper Specific Format Required)
2. Design Records & Ballooned Drawings
3. Approved Engineering Change Documents
4. Customer Engineering Approval
5 DFMEA
6. Process Flow Diagram
7. PFMEA
8. Control Plan
9. Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA)
10. Dimensional Results (Cooper Specific Format Required)
11. Material, Performance Test Results
12. Initial Process Study (Cpk) Capability Studies
13. Qualified Laboratory Documentation
14. Appearance Approval Report (AAR)
15. Sample Product Parts
16. Master Sample(s)
17. Checking Aids
18. Cooper-Specific Requirements
A. Tooling information Form
B. Packaging Form
C. Inspection Plan (Asian Sourcing Center Only)
D. Specification Deviation
E. Supplier PPAP Worksheet
Cooper industries have many of these forms available to suppliers at no charge as part
of our “PPAP kit” which is available on CD. You can use the Cooper supplied forms or
7
any AIAG compliant forms with the exception of Element 1 (PSW) and Element 10
(Dimensional Report). Both of these elements must be submitted on the Cooper
Industries format.
Submission Levels
Submission levels define which elements are required to be submitted. The levels are
used for different reasons and applications. The level to be submitted is determined by
Cooper Industries, and unless otherwise noted, always defaults to Level 3 which is a full
PPAP submission. There are five submission levels listed below, and each is typically
applied to the specific areas listed.
Level 1.
Warrant only and Appearance Approval Report as requested
submitted to the customer. Applied to: ‘Non-critical’ parts, ‘non
critical’ raw/bulk material or catalog/ commodity parts for electrical
applications and re-certification of existing parts previously approved
by Cooper at levels 3, 4 or 5. Also used for self-certification.
Level 2.
Warrant with product samples and limited supporting data
submitted to the customer. Applied to: Critical Bulk products such
as Plastic/Paint/Chemicals, critical fasteners, simple material changes,
simple revision level only changes or simple print updates not affecting
form-fit-function. This level can also be applied to low and medium risk
parts within a product family.
Level 3.
Warrant with product samples and complete supporting data
submitted to customer. Default Cooper Industries Submission
Level Applied to: New parts on Cooper programs, changes affecting
form-fit-function, reliability, or performance. All products resourced to
new suppliers, serial production parts, and existing high risk parts
undergoing a part number change.
Level 4.
Warrant and other requirements as defined by the customer. This
level is reserved for special applications only. Applied to: This level can
only be applied with prior approval from the designated divisional
Cooper Quality PPAP representative.
Level 5.
Warrant with product samples and complete supporting data
reviewed at the supplier’s manufacturing location. Applied to: On
site review as requested by each Cooper Division.
Note: A level 4 submission cannot be utilized without the consent of your Cooper
Industries Quality or Supplier Quality Representative. Parts sourced in other countries
that are delivered to North America must be translated into English and must be Level 3
8
submissions. Changes to existing parts will be handled on a case-by-case basis and
submissions other than level 3 must have prior approval from your Division level North
American Quality or Supplier Quality representative.
Supplier PPAP Checklist
Cooper Industries has a customer specific requirement that can be used for referencing
and organizing a PPAP submission. The Supplier PPAP Checklist lists all of the
required elements for each LEVEL option 1 through 5.
The level for your PPAP submission is determined by Cooper Industries. If you are not
sure what level you are submitting to you should check with your Divisional Cooper
Industries
Quality
or
Supplier
Quality
representative. The Supplier Checklist provides
an opportunity to assign responsibilities
internally and documents concerns to Cooper
about specific areas within the submission. If
you have issues or problems with any of the
specific elements of a PPAP submission then
they should be documented here or on the
PSW cover page. For example, if at the time of
submission you have not received approval of
your packaging material, then this would be the
place to document that concern. All concerns
must be documented at the time of submission
to avoid rejection of the issue at a later time.
Below is the top portion of Supplier PPAP Checklist and the full form is in the addendum
section of this manual and the PPAP Forms Kit.
9
Electronic Submission/Submission Method
Cooper Industries requires that all PPAPs be submitted electronically. There are
two preferred methods of submission:
1. Upload to the Cooper Division designated FTP site. (preferred)
2. Email to your quality/supplier quality representative.
Each Cooper division handles delivery of the submission differently so you should check
to make sure you are sending your documentation to the correct location. It is preferred
that the PPAP be 1 PDF file of the entire submission. If this is not possible then we
would request that each element would be in PDF format and not Native format such as
MS Excel or Word. Important: The use of a paper or email submission must have
prior approval by the authorized Supplier Quality or Quality representative. All
submissions must be received prior to the PPAP due date.
Significant Production Run
PPAP data must be submitted from a “significant production run”, which is identified
by AIAG in the PPAP standard as 300 consecutive pieces sampled randomly.
Unless otherwise agreed upon by the Cooper Industries and the supplier, sampling
should be taken from no less than 300 pieces from a production run, utilizing
production equipment, tooling and production employees operating at production
rate.
The intent is that all data reflects the actual production process to be used during
production. You are required to document the date, time and the actual rate of this
run on the Part Submission Warrant.
Submission Status
The review and approval process will be managed by each Cooper division.
Subsequently the PPAP submission will be reviewed and dispositioned with one of
the following submission statuses:
Approved: A formal acceptance of the submission within the guidelines of any and
all criteria set forth by the Cooper division managing the submission.
Rejected: The provision is not acceptable and needs to be resubmitted for approval.
(Note: Submission to the wrong revision level or part number will constitute an
automatic rejection.)
Interim: An interim approval can occur through an agreement with quality
management. The product must be deemed “sellable” by Cooper and the interim
10
may only be issued for 90 days. The submission must have an approved
Specification Deviation that clearly identifies the corrective action plan to achieve full
approval within the 90 day period. The Specification Deviation is in the Cooper
Industries’ PPAP Forms kit.
Ongoing Requirements
Cooper Industries reserves the right to request any information you have
provided in any data or documented in any element of approval, at any time,
including after the approval has been granted. Cooper Industries reserves the right
to require recertification at any time.
As a supplier to Cooper Industries, the expectation is that you will build your product
and processes to be robust not only for the launch of the product but for the life of
the product. The expectation is that your system will include verification of the parts
and the part requirements on an “on-going basis”. This includes building periodic
conformance testing into your overall process such as routine dimensional analysis,
functional analysis and process verification.
Our recommendation is that you have designated intervals for verifying Critical To
Quality (CTQ) characteristics and key process related methods. All of these must be
identified on the control plan as part of your ongoing process to verify that your
product meets Cooper’s requirements. Cooper reserves the right at any time
throughout the life of the product to request evidence of this ongoing
conformance.
Critical to Quality (CTQ) Features
¾ CTQ Characteristic Definition:
¾ A critical PART requirement specified on a controlling document (typically
an engineering drawing, specification or performance requirements)
¾ A critical PROCESS requirement identified by Customer or Supplier.
¾ Directly represents the safety, regulatory, or primary
performance requirements by the end customer or business
functional
¾ Requires verification of part conformance during first production.
¾ Requires documented evidence of process control to maintain part
conformance through the life of the product
11
Critical to Quality (CTQ) characteristics are those features that most affect the
outcome of a product or process. CTQ controls must be designed and implemented
as part of your company’s advanced quality planning. Special attention is required
during this phase to identify and control variables that affect the conformance of the
product.
Cooper’s expectation is that you will address all CTQs in the control plan and ensure
that you have a robust process for consistently achieving all CTQ requirements as
they are defined in the Cooper part print. Each division will have its own CTQ
designation methodology. Specific definition per division will be found in Addendum
D. Please refer to your division Quality or Supplier Quality Representative with any
question concerning.
CTQ are typically mandatory for Element 12, the “initial process study” which is
sometimes referred to as the capability element. Cooper requires capability studies
for all CTQ and any process related characteristics that either you or Cooper identify
as critical. This section is mandatory even if there are no CTQs on your part print
because there are always critical elements and characteristics of the process that
manufactures the part.
As a supplier developing product for Cooper, your team may discover process and
sometimes additional product characteristics that are critical to part performance.
Even if the print does not clearly define any CTQs, Cooper expects that suppliers will
identify CTQs for their processes and methods. NOTE: SEE APPENDEX B
PPAP Training
Cooper Industries offers Supplier PPAP training at several levels. You can contact
either a member of Cooper Plant Quality or Supplier Quality for more information.
The training for suppliers is typically around 4-6 hours and is offered at various times
throughout the year both in an on-site format and via Webinar. For these offerings
contact your Division Supplier
Quality Representative.
You can also refer to the AIAG
website (www.aiag.org) for
additional information, training
and materials on the PPAP
standard 4th edition as well
many of the various elements
within the standard.
AIAG has developed industry
standard publications available for many of the elements that go into specific detail
on the concepts and how to plan your approach. In addition you can register for
additional AIAG training on these and many other important industry standards.
12
Instructions for completing a PPAP Submission
All submissions must be received prior to the PPAP due date. The review and
approval process will be managed by each Cooper division.
Element 1 Part Submission Warrant (PSW)
The purpose of the Part Submission Warrant (PSW) is to document the
submission and the approval or rejection of purchased parts prior to production.
Cooper Industries has developed its own Submission Warrant document and this
form is a required element of PPAP. It must be submitted as part of the PPAP at
every submission level. Cooper Industries will not accept the AIAG form or any
internal PSW format.
Completing the Part Submission Warrant
The Part Submission Warrant is included in
the forms file in the Cooper Industries’ PPAP
Kit. It must be filled out and signed by the
supplier. The part number must match the
Purchase Order or material agreement that
is provided by Cooper Purchasing.
The form must be submitted in this format,
with the correct part number, revision and
submission level. This is 1 of 2 forms that
are mandatory for all Cooper submissions.
Any fields that do not apply to your
submission should be filled in with “N/A”
(Not Applicable). It is critical to make sure
the PSW is filled out correctly, and contains accurate and legible information. A
sample of the Part Submission Warrant described above can be found below. Each
field in the Cooper PSW in the forms kit has comments that provide additional
clarity on each field.
13
Element 2 Design Records and Ballooned Drawings
The purpose of designed records and ballooned drawings is to document and
provide a copy of the formal part print and to provide any additional engineering
records for reference.
Example of a Balloon Drawing
A ballooned drawing shows the parts or assemblies in a part print with numbered
“balloons” that point to individual dimensions and requirements of the part. The
numbers on the ballooned drawing correlate with the numbers found on the
Dimensional Data Sheet. A ballooned drawing must be submitted as part of
PPAP for every submission level when there are dimensional results.
14
Completing the balloon drawing
All part requirements on the Cooper print must be ballooned and numbered for
reference and measurement. These may include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Dimensions and tolerances of parts
Electrical requirements (performance data, functional tests, etc.)
Visual features (color, texture, etc.)
Chemical characteristics (cure time, etc.)
Physical and mechanical properties (tensile strength, plating thickness,
heat-treat hardness, etc.)
Any other specified requirement that you have the capability to measure or
that is described in print notes or referenced specifications.
When dimensions are specified at multiple locations on the drawing, the data for
each location should be numbered separately.
Dimensional data for Element 10 such as dimensions and tolerances must be
addressed on the Cooper Industries Dimensional Data Sheet.
Material or Performance data should be included in Element 11 on a format that
allows for clear interpretation of the results. For example, material results can be
addressed using a material composition report or a certificate of analysis. Either an
in-house format or the AIAG formats for material and performance are acceptable.
Element 3 Approved Engineering Change Documentation
This section is used to cover anything that is not addressed in a part print such as
emails, Supplier Change Requests (SCR), and Feasibility Studies.
9 Cooper ECNs must be approved, not pending.
9 Print change submissions must have current prints.
9 Emails can only clarify requirements, not define them
9 Emails cannot re-define a requirement in lieu of a
print change.
9 All supplier initiated changes must have a copy approved Supplier Change
Request (SCR) form.
The Supplier Change Request must be approved by both Cooper Purchasing and
Quality prior to making any proposed changes. You should not proceed with your
change until you have an approved SCR from Cooper.
15
Element 4 Customer Engineering Approvals
Customer Engineering Approvals are used to demonstrate pre-approval by Cooper’s
customers of a design. Customer Engineering Approvals are not required for
supplier submissions. In the event that this would be required in the future we have
maintained a placeholder within the Cooper requirements.
Element 5 Design FMEA (DFMEA)
Design FMEA stands for Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA) and
shows evidence that potential failure modes and their associated risks have been
addressed in order to eliminate or minimize their effects through product
design changes and improvements. DFMEA is only required when the part is
designed by the supplier and must address all Critical to Quality characteristics
(CTQs) and any potential voice of the customer inputs identified in the Cooper
Project Scope.
The date on the DFMEA should show release prior to print release. Severity,
Occurrence and Detection ratings are used when performing FMEA activities.
These rating scales must be compliant with the AIAG guidelines for FMEA (4th
edition) and definitions are included in the DFMEA worksheet as well as this
handbook.
Cooper has included a worksheet format in the forms kit. Above is the form and to
the right is an example of how the ratings scale for Severity is available in the
comments for easy reference. Any potential failure mode not mitigated in the
DFMEA should be included in the PFMEA also included on the PPAP worksheet.
Any potential failure mode with a severity ranking of 9 or 10 must be addressed with
16
a corrective action plan. Furthermore, potential failure items in the top 25 percent
high RPN ranking should have corrective action items addressing the potential
failure mode.
Organizations that have already developed a DFMEA or PFMEA can submit that as
part of their PPAP submission. For organizations without a DFMEA or PFMEA,
sample forms have been included in the PPAP kit. The chart below describes the
fields in the DFMEA.
Completing the DFMEA
The DFMEA supports the design process by reducing the risk of failures. The
DFMEA should be initiated before the design concept is finalized. Each item/function
needs to be addressed. Any potential failure mode of the item/function should be
defined as completely as possible. Recommended actions should be recorded. All
severities of 9 or 10 must have an associated action plan. Prevention is the
preferred method to address the design failure mode. If prevention is not
possible, then highlight detection controls. The DFMEA is not meant to be a stand
alone document and the results of the DFMEA can be used in the PFMEA.
The FMEA Revision 4 tables for Severity, Occurrence and Detection are embedded
in the cell comments on Cooper’s FMEA template. The three of these ratings
multiplied together produce the initial Risk Priority Number or RPN.
Severity x Occurrence x Detection = RPN
The use of an RPN Threshold is not recommended practice for determining
the need for actions. Applying thresholds assumes that RPNs are a measure of
relative risk (which they often are not) and that continuous improvement is not
required (which it is). Cooper Industries recommends that you treat all FMEA activity
on a separate case by case basis and that you address the top 25% of your highest
RPN values within the FMEA activity you are doing.
PPAP Tools Kit DFMEA Form
17
Example of Guidance Comments within each cell of the DFMEA Form.
Example of Severity, Occurrence and Detection Tables within the cell comments of
the DFMEA Form. (per FMEA revision 4).
Element 6 Process Flow Diagrams
The purpose of Process Flow Diagrams is to document and clarify all the steps
required in the manufacturing of a part. The Primary process steps must match both
the Control plan and the PFMEA. Process flows must include the entire
manufacturing process (receiving through shipping).
Scrap
Raw Goods
Receiving
Raw Goods
Warehouse
Inspection
Testing
Manufactuing process
Non-conforming
product flow
Finished Goods
Warehousing
Shipping
Rework
18
The Process Flow Diagram must also include all key steps in the process and all
offline activities (such as measurement, inspection and handling). The flow of
nonconforming material such as scrap parts, non-conforming parts and rework parts
should also be included. The Process Flow can be provided in any format used
within an organization. (Examples are available in the training material that is part of
the PPAP tool kit.)
Element 7 Process FMEA (PFMEA)
The Process FMEA (PFMEA- Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) is used
to show evidence that any potential failure modes and risks have been assessed at
the manufacturing process level. Process FMEA’s can be submitted in the Cooper
format or any AIAG compliant format. Cooper Industries has provided a PFMEA
Worksheet in excel format in the PPAP Forms kit. Like the DFMEA it also contains
that latest rating definitions for FMEA Revision 4.
A PFMEA should be performed for every part, piece of equipment or process
involved in manufacturing. PFMEA is a cross-functional activity that is performed
internally, updated routinely and reviewed periodically. Severity, occurrence and
detection ranking values are included in this handbook, as well as in the PPAP
toolkit.
Cooper Industries requires that any severity ranking of 9 or 10 be addressed with a
corrective action plan. Furthermore, potential failure items in the top 25 percent of
the high RPN ranking items must have action items addressing the potential failure
mode. This in turn will lower the re-calculated RPN value for that failure mode. Any
high RPN process concerns should be carried over and addressed in the control
plan. All critical failure modes must be addressed.
Completing the PFMEA
The PFMEA worksheet is a tool used to identify and show potential process risks
associated with the manufacture of each part. It also highlights the controls
associated with each process. Each process step/function should be identified with
an action plan to address the process failure mode. All high RPN process concerns
should be carried over to the control plan.
Potential Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
Process FMEA
Print #
Item Name
Rev #
Core Team
Process/Step
Function
Requirements
Process Responsibility
Contact Number
Key Date
Customer Manufacturing Site
C
S l
Potential
Potential Effects
E a
Failure Mode
of Failure
V s
s
Please indicate EITHER:
1.) A designated RPN threshold for this process
2.) A target percentage of steps to be addressed.
Check One
FMEA Number
Prepared By
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date
Current Process Controls
Potential Cause(s)/
Failure Mechanisms
O
C
C
Prevention
Detection
D R
Recommended
E P
Action(s)
T N
Responsibility
and
Completion
Date
Action Results
Actions Taken
S O D R
E C E P
V C T N
19
The recommended actions in any FMEA should address
the initial high RPN numbers to minimize risk in the
manufacturing process. The goal is to drive the final RPN
number as low as possible.
FMEA is a cross-functional activity that can lead to
inconsistency particularly when specific team members are
not trained. A number of organizations provide good
training on both DFMEA ad PFMEA. In addition the AIAG
manual (shown to the left) is the industry reference for
comprehensive details on FMEA and can be purchased
through their website. In addition, AIAG also offers
additional training that you or your team can attend. Your
Cooper
Industries
Quality
or
Supplier
Quality
representative can also assist with any questions concerning FMEA. Below is a list
of some of the more common mistakes made when performing FMEAs and should be
avoided when performing the activity. It is recommended that you review this list with
your team prior to performing FMEA.
Examples of common mistakes made on PFMEA
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Misapplication of Severity, Occurrence and Detection
Redefining Severity, Occurrence and Detection
Over estimating the effectiveness of a “Recommended Action”
Applying RPN thresholds arbitrarily
Not recognizing all potential failures.
Failure to properly identify the customer.
Misapplication of ranking scales.
Confusing Failure Modes with Effects or Failure Modes with Causes.
Allowing the PFMEA to turn into a design review.
Element 8 Control Plan
A Control Plan defines the operations, processes, materials, equipment,
methodologies, and CTQs (as determined by Cooper and suppliers) for controlling
variations in key product or process characteristics integral to the manufacturing
process. Its purpose is to communicate the supplier’s decisions during the entire
manufacturing process from materials purchase through final shipping. Specifically,
the control plan should address the following:
¾ Methods of production
¾ Identification of CTQ characteristics’ controls
¾ Secondary or outsourced operations
20
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Materials and their physical and chemical characteristics
Types of process equipment at each operation
Types of test equipment used to measure each characteristic
Specifications, sampling strategy, control and reaction methods used
Periodic conformance testing and product verification
All processes must have a control plan that defines all methods used for process control
and complies with the customer-specified requirements. The control plan must clearly
state each step in the process; the specification & all Critical to Quality (CTQs) must be
addressed for product and process.
Completing the Control Plan
Completing the Control Plan is a fairly straightforward process whereby the supplier
simply documents all materials and processes involved in the manufacturing process
from start to finish. The process flow diagram and ballooned drawing provide inputs to
the Control Plan. All CTQs identified as Process, First-Piece, or Safety Related by the
supplier must be listed on the control plan form. Additionally, the supplier will list
decisions that are foreseen to affect the outcome of production.
Example of Reaction Plan
A control plan should address all testing requirements, inspection and measurement
that are required to make a quality product. Suppliers should also include other details
they know to be vital in the process. The control plan cannot be excessively dependent
on visual inspection and should target prevention techniques wherever possible. The
control plan can be submitted on the Cooper Industries supplied format or any AIAG
compliant format.
The control plan should be developed in stages from proto-type through production.
Early planning on the control plan will usually result in a more robust process.
Suppliers should develop a pre-launch control plan early in the development of a new
product and submit it to their Cooper Industries representative for feedback. This will
allow both the supplier and Cooper to troubleshoot and finalize the production level
control plan early and avoid unexpected costs or delays. Cooper may also request that
you provide specific documents required at PPAP early in the development phase and
the most common ones are the PFMEA and a pre-launch Control Plan.
21
It is vital the control plan describes the actions required within the manufacturing
process flow to ensure that all process outputs are in a state of control and that every
step in the process requiring disposition has a defined “Control Method” and “Reaction
Plan” outlined on the control plan. This includes all forms of testing, inspection,
measurement and process setup. The “Reaction Plan” should clearly define any
contingency planning that may need to be addressed during the manufacturing of the
product.
Finally, the Control Plan should be a living active part of your overall quality system.
Cooper Industries prefers that all suppliers develop the Control Plan methodology as
part of their everyday practice and Quality system. Control plans should not be
developed just for a PPAP submission and in the event of an issue will typically be
requested by Cooper.
Therefore it is in the best interest of all suppliers to embrace
the overall concepts that develop from implementing a
robust Control Plan. Cooper Industries may also request
that a specific pre-launch Control Plan be developed that
minimizes the overall risk of specific product concerns
during the launch phase. Unless otherwise requested the
control plan for all PPAP submissions is the “production”
control plan.
The control plan methodology is formally defined in the
AIAG APQP guidelines. You must utilize an AIAG compliant
format and Cooper has provided one in the PPAP Forms
Kit.
Below is the control plan template provided in the Cooper Industries PPAP Kit.
Cooper Industries Control Plan Form
Control Plan
Prototype
Pre-Launch
Production
Control Plan Number
Date (Orig.)
Key Contact / Phone
Part Number/ Latest Change (Rev) Level
Part Description
Current Release Level
Current Release Date
Supplier Code
Plant Location
Core Team
Supplier Name
Quality Department Approval
Customer Engineering Approval / Date (If Req'd)
Supplier Plant Approval
Other Approval / Date (If Req'd)
METHODS
PRODUCT
SAMPLE
PROCESS
PRODUCT / PROCESS /
SPECIFICATION /
TOLERANCE
EVALUATION/
MEASUREMENT
TECHNIQUE
FREQ
NO.
SPECIAL
CHAR.
CLASS
SIZE
PART /
PROCESS
NUMBER
CHARACTERISTICS
PROCESS NAME / MACHINE DEVICES / JIG /
TOOLS FOR
OPERATION
MANUFACTURING
DESCRIPTION
CONTROL METHOD
REACTION PLAN
22
Element 9 Measurement System Analysis Studies (MSA)
Measurement system analysis (MSA) is a mathematical method of determining
how much the variation within the measurement process contributes to overall
process variability. MSA is used to ensure the use of the right measurement system
for running production. Detail on MSA is found in the AIAG manual which defines
guidelines for stability, bias, linearity, repeatability and reproducibility.
Cooper Industries requires an analysis of the capability of all measurement tools
identified in the Control Plan (in process and offline gages). The requirement for
Cooper Suppliers is to perform a Gage R&R study using Total Tolerance on each
measurement tool. The percentage R&R should be at 10% or less.
A Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility (GR&R) Study is used to ensure that
measurements used in the manufacturing process are reasonably consistent
regardless of how many times they are performed, or by who they are performed.
GR&R studies can be useful to suppliers in that they can identify equipment that is in
need of service, or operators who may need additional training on the equipment.
Below is the Cooper Industries format provided in the PPAP Tool Kit.
A GR&R must be submitted for devices measuring data on CTQs and for each
measurement device on all Level 3 submissions. Guidelines for Cooper Suppliers
performing GR&R are:
¾ Cooper requires an analysis of the capability of ALL measurement tools
identified in the Control Plan. (In process and offline gages). The minimum
requirement for Cooper Suppliers are:
A Gage R&R study using Total Tolerance on each measurement tool
¾ % R&R should be at 10% or less for CTQs
¾ Marginal gages (between 10% and 30%)*
¾ Gages with R&R at 30% or more cannot be used
Important: Marginal Gages with 10 - 30% error need an action plan
to address and improve the method of measurement.
Below is a table showing the percentage breakdown for acceptance from the study.
GR&RTOL% < 10
Pass - Gage System is Useable
10 ≤ GR&R TOL% ≤ 30
Gage System is useable but
marginal
GR&RTOL% > 30
Fail - Gage System is Unstable
23
Completing the GR&R Multiple Worksheet
The individual completing the GR&R Multiple worksheet should fill out the data at the
top of the sheet as appropriate. The Gage Type, Gage ID, Calibration Date, and Unit
of Measure should be entered. “USL” and “LSL” values should be entered based on
the specifications and tolerances for the feature as listed on the ballooned drawing.
This worksheet is appropriate for 2-3 operators. You must enter an operator name or
id for the results to be counted.
The worksheet is also
designed for two to three
trials. (Two is the minimum
to establish repeatability.
Three is preferred.) Ten
sample parts should be
selected and tested to act
as a reference standard.
All operators will use these
same ten parts. Also, all
operators will use the same
gage, and the gage will be
reset
before
each
measurement is taken. If
the reference standard
parts
have
unique
identifiers you can enter
them into the “Part #”
column. Once all the data
is entered, the Disposition
will reflect either “Pass”,
“Marginal”, or “Fail”.
Two graphs are provided
showing the performance of
operator
measurements.
Even when a GR&R shows
that your gage system is
passing or useable, an examination of the graphs can aid in refining your gage
system.
For instance, if one operator’s results aren’t consistent with the other two, then one
or more of the operators may need retraining on the use of the gage. If all three
operators show consistent deviations from mean, the reference standard part itself
may be the problem.
24
Element 10 Dimensional Results
The Dimensional Results are documented in the “Dimensional Data Sheet”
provided in the PPAP Tool Kit. The measurements on this form should correlate with
your balloon drawing from Element 2.
The purpose is to show conformance to the Cooper Industries part print on
dimensions and all other print requirements. Non-dimensional requirements should
be addressed in the Material and Performance section of the PPAP submission.
Cooper requires a full dimensional layout of the part on all PPAP submissions
except level 1 for all drawings related to the part.
The parts used for dimensional data must be from production tooling and randomly
sampled from a run at production rate. The dimensional report must address all of
the following:
¾ All dimensions.
¾ All applicable notes that have variable dimensions (example: tensile test)
¾ Any dimensions contained on reference prints.
¾ Tolerances that include bonus points for Geometric Dimensioning &
Tolerancing (GDT) callouts.
Sample Requirements
Important: The parts measured for Element 10 should be the same parts
submitted as formal samples in Element 15.
Single Cavity Mold
The minimum number of parts to measure for the dimensional element is 3 parts.
These must be the same 3 parts that are submitted as Sample Parts in Element 15.
All 3 parts should be identified with the corresponding number on the part or the tag.
Multiple Cavity Molds
The minimum number of parts to measure for the dimensional element is 1 part from
each cavity. A minimum of 1 part from each cavity should be submitted as Sample
Parts in Element 15 and these must be the same parts measured for dimensional
data. All parts should be identified with the corresponding number on the part or the
tag.
Completing the Dimensional Data Sheet
All dimensional requirements on the ballooned drawing must be listed on the
Dimensional Data Sheet. The Dimensional element must be submitted on the
Cooper Industries Dimensional Data Sheet. If multiple pages are required to
complete a full inspection, all copies of the Dimensional Data Sheet must include
completed headers. When requirements are referenced at multiple locations on the
25
print the data must be recorded for each individual location. All callouts and notes
must be included.
All sections of the Dimensional Data Sheet must be filled out completely. The
Method of Measurement must be documented for every line item set of data. In
addition, on GD&T tolerances the specification and any bonus tolerance must be
added to the minimum and maximum tolerances.
Example: This call out would require 3 lines
of separate data on the dimensional report.
1. Hole diameter (.25 ± 0.2)
2. True Hole Position (005 MMC on Datum A,B,C)
3. Cylindricity (0.1)
The following conditions will result in this requirement being deemed unacceptable:
1. Any requirement that is non-conforming
2. Any requirement with excessive range or variation
3. Any requirement that is too close to the proposed tolerance limits
Any of these conditions will
require corrective action to be
addressed and identified on the
Dimensional Data Sheet. The
proposed corrective action should
address the cause and what will
be done in response. This same
issue should be addressed on the
“specification deviation” sheet
provided in the forms kit.
26
Any concerns identified in the Dimensional Data should be brought to the attention
of Cooper Engineering or Quality before submitting your PPAP submission. We
expect all suppliers to place the formal dispositions on each line item.
Element 11 Material and Performance Test Results
Material/Performance Test Results is a broad category for the majority of all other
test results other than the dimensional results reported in the previous element.
Either your own in house documents or AIAG forms may be used for test results.
Cooper Industries is primarily concerned that the material is confirmed and the
acceptable performance is demonstrated. If there is a performance requirement
make sure the results of the testing are acceptable, credible and performed to the
specification. Together with the Dimensional Data Sheet, this section of the
submission should address a complete review of all product specifications and/or
part print requirements.
Material Test Results should be provided in the form of a material composition
report typically called a Certificate of Analysis (COA) from an accredited lab that
confirms the material content meets a known standard. It is your responsibility as a
supplier to Cooper to confirm the composition of your material for both the PPAP
submission and ongoing conformance. It is also your responsibility to plan for
ongoing material conformance testing and identify this as a separate requirement
(line item) in your control plan. This ensures that you have a plan for continuing
conformance to the material standard.
Cooper’s expectation is that you have a designated lab (internally or externally) that
is capable of confirming your raw material on a periodic basis. The interval of
inspection is recommended by the supplier however Cooper reserves the right to
request a change in the
frequency of inspection at
any time throughout the life
of the part to ensure
quality. In addition Cooper
may require submission of
composition test results or
other forms of material
certification as part of the
supplier’s
standard
process.
Certificate of Compliance (COC) is acceptable but not preferred. Cooper Industries
prefers to have results in the format of Certificate of Analysis (COA). COA will show
27
actual test results to a known standard rather than simply certifying that a material
meets the standard.
Performance Test Results should be acceptable, credible and meet the agreed
upon specifications to be measured. Performance results may include data
confirming any referenced specifications in the part print or specific testing required
by Cooper Industries.
Cooper Industries, engineering or quality will communicate specific material,
performance, and testing requirements either the in part print, reference
specifications or by specific request prior to PPAP approval. It is the responsibility
of the supplier to confirm the data and format for this requirement with their
Cooper Quality or Supplier Quality representative.
Element 12 Initial Process Study (Cpk, Ppk)
The purpose of initial process studies (Cp, CpK, Pp, Ppk) is to determine if the
production process is likely to manufacture product that will meet our requirements.
Initial process studies (capability) are mandatory for all CTQs.
Subgroups are the preferred method of determining Cpk in most cases. There are
two primary indexes used in determining process capability.
Cpk predicts future capability and should be used when developing new parts or
revising specifications on a part. Cpk should also be used when materials,
processes, manufacturing location, or equipment have significantly changed or
material suppliers have changed (including Certificates of Analysis).
Ppk indicates past performance. Use Ppk when you are a new supplier to Cooper,
but have already been manufacturing a part.
Minimum requirement for capability studies is 25 subgroups containing at least 100
readings and sampled consecutively from a “significant production run.” If testing
involves destructive tests of expensive parts, Cpk by Moving Range can also be
allowed. Minimum acceptable capability for all CTQs is 1.33 and 1.67 for all
safety related CTQs.
Reporting Ppk vs. Cpk
When asked to report a CTQ for initial process study, what must be reported is the
Ppk or Cpk number derived from a study of actual production parts from a
production run that are sampled randomly.
Whether Ppk or Cpk is used will depend on the reason for the PPAP submission.
28
CPK
PPK
Cpk moving range
(Cpk) If a supplier is submitting a PPAP for a (a) new part, (b) a part with revised
specifications, (c) a part in which the materials, processes, manufacturing location,
or production equipment have significantly changed, or (d) a part in which the
material suppliers have changed, then the supplier will be asked to report the Cpk.
(Ppk) If the supplier (a) has already been manufacturing the specified part, but is a
new supplier to Cooper Industries, or (b) is an existing supplier to Cooper Industries
that has been found to have supplied a large number of nonconforming parts, then
the supplier will report Ppk numbers.
Whether using Cpk or Ppk, it must be noted that where processes
multi-cavity/multi-spindle tooling, the Cpk or Ppk numbers reported
survey of parts from each individual cavity or spindle, not the total
from a given machine. This will help isolate non-conformances
problems with individual cavities or spindles.
exist involving
must reflect a
output of parts
resulting from
Cooper Capability Forms
Cooper Industries has provided 3 separate forms in the PPAP kit to use for
capability studies. Above are the forms for Cpk, Ppk Cpk moving range.
29
Completing the Ppk Worksheet
Fill out the relevant information at the top of the Ppk worksheet. Remember that for
safety-related features, a Cpk/Ppk greater than 1.67 is required. For functional
features a Cpk/Ppk greater than 1.33 is required.
Enter the Upper Specification Limit (USL) and Lower Specification Limit (LSL) from
the ballooned drawing. If you need to calculate the USL/LSL, then use the following
formulas:
USL = Specification + Tolerance
LSL = Specification - Tolerance
For each item, enter the value recorded during your testing procedure. If the part
being tested has a unique identifier associated with it, you can enter that identifier in
the left column under “Item Number” and overwrite the default value. Once the data
has been entered, the disposition will reflect whether the Ppk is “Acceptable”, or is
“Rejected”. If it becomes necessary to clear the values, the user can single left-click
the “Clear Test Values” button. This will clear the “USL” and “LSL” fields, the data in
the “Test Data” column, and will return the “Test No.” column to its default
enumeration.
After completing the Ppk worksheet, the supplier should examine the results. Even if
the worksheet “Accepts” a process as incontrol, the distribution of data on the histogram
may indicate a process that could be improved.
Ideally, the histogram should resemble a bell
shaped curve, be somewhat symmetrical, and
all the data points should be within the limits of
the graph.
If the worksheet “Fails” the process, or the
histogram shows a process that is barely incontrol,
the
supplier
should investigate factors
that might be causing this
to happen and run the
analysis again after the
issues
have
been
resolved.
Remember
that
this
worksheet should only be
used when you are
interested in “estimating”
past performance.
30
Completing the Cpk Worksheet
The individual completing the Cpk Subgroup worksheet
should fill out the data at the top of the sheet as
appropriate. Then they should determine which
Subgroup configuration is most appropriate for data
collected and click the button next to that subgroup.
Upon doing so, the table will change such that only
columns and rows where data is expected to be entered
will be active.
Data entered outside these columns will not be included
in overall Cpk calculations. Finally, the “USL” and “LSL”
should be entered. After all data is entered, be sure to
save the workbook. If the subgroup being tested has a
unique identifier associated with it, you can enter that
identifier in the left column under “Subgroup” and
overwrite the default value.
If at any time the user wishes to clear the values, they can single left-click the “Clear
Data” button. This will clear the “USL” and “LSL” fields, the data in the “Test Data”
column, and will return the “Subgroup” column to its default enumeration.
As with Ppk, the supplier will want to examine the results of the Cpk histogram. The
Cpk histogram should resemble a bell shaped curve that is centered on the graph.
Further, the Control Chart should show data randomly distributed on or about the
mean or “R-Bar” line. If data shows extreme fluctuations, or cyclical patterns, it can
indicate either a process that is out-of-control, or merely an incorrect sub grouping.
Below is the Cpk worksheet. This worksheet should be used for the majority of
capability studies unless you are estimating past performance.
31
Completing the Cpk Moving Range Worksheet
When using the Cpk Moving Range worksheet fill out the data at the top of the sheet
as appropriate. Fill in the USL and LSL fields as appropriate. Lastly, data collected
during testing is entered under the “Test Value” column. If the Subgroup being
tested has a unique identifier associated with it, you can enter that identifier in the
left column under “Subgroup” and overwrite the default value.
If at any time the user wishes to clear the values, they can single left-click the “Clear
Data” button. This will clear the “USL” and “LSL” fields, the data in the “Test Data”
column, and will return the “Subgroup” column to its default enumeration.
Interpretation of results for the Cpk Moving Range worksheet is similar to that for the
Subgroups worksheet. Remember that even if the Cpk meets or exceed Cooper
Industries standards, repeating patterns or extreme peaks and valleys in the Control
Chart may indicate a process that is only barely in control, and may need further
examination
Below is the Cpk moving range worksheet. Remember to utilize this worksheet when
you need Cpk data but the parts you are studying have high expense or involve
destructive testing in order to perform the study.
Cpk for Moving Range
Use when: (a) new part, (b) part with revised specifications, (c) part in which the materials, processes, manufacturing location, or production equipment have
significantly changed, or (d) part in which the material suppliers have changed AND testing is too expensive to be conducted by subgroups.
Part Number:
Drawing Number:
Drawing Rev.:
Rev. Date:
Drawing Location:
Part Feature:
Feature Symbol:
Other Information
Supplier Name:
Supplier Address:
Date
Supplier Contact
PCA Supplier Name:
PCA Address:
GR&R Contact
PCA Contact
USL
Distribution
PCA Summary
Process Data
Subgroup Test Value
Range
1
Potential Capability
LSL=
Cp=
USL=
CpkL=
CpkU=
2
0.00
Mean=
3
0.00
StDev
Cpk=
4
0.00
UCLX=
%Cr=
5
0.00
LCLX=
Max=
0.0000
6
0.00
UCLR=
Min=
0.0000
7
0.00
8
0.00
9
0.00
1
Spec
10
0.00
2
0
11
0.00
3
#N/A
12
0.00
4
#N/A
13
0.00
5
#N/A
14
0.00
6
#N/A
15
0.00
7
#N/A
16
0.00
8
#N/A
17
0.00
0
Frequency
LSL
Frequency
0
Test Values
Reporting Cpk Subgroup vs. Cpk Moving Range
In most cases, Cpk numbers will be reported based on the results of the Cpk
Subgroup worksheet. This worksheet gives a choice between subgroups measuring
30x2 (30 subgroups of size 2), 25x5 (25 subgroups of size 5), or 50x5 (fifty
32
subgroups of size 5). Unless the supplier receives instructions otherwise, they
should choose the subgroup configuration most appropriate to analyzing the data.
That decision will be a balance between maximizing data points, and minimizing
overall cost of testing.
For instance, if reporting Cpk involves nondestructive testing of safety related
features, then the 50x5 subgroup will yield 250 data points and is therefore
preferred. On the other hand, destructive testing of slightly more expensive items
with only functional characteristics can be satisfactorily completed with a 30x2
subgroup (60 data points). If expense is really a concern, then the Cpk Moving
Range worksheet will be more appropriate for calculating Cpk numbers.
Element 13 Qualified Laboratory Documentation
The purpose of Qualified Laboratory Documentation is to ensure that the testing for
PPAP has been done by a qualified lab. If your organization is performs testing or
measurement internally or externally at an outside facility then proof of Scope and
accreditation is required.
Internal Labs located at the Supplier
All suppliers that have testing or measurement performed on site must provide the
following in this section of the PPAP submission.
1. Record/Scope that identifies the testing to be done and it must include:
2. List of your personnel’s competency and training to perform the testing
3. List of all test equipment used in process and offline.
4. List of methods and standards used to calibrate the equipment.
External Labs located offsite from the Supplier
If you are sending out for measurement and testing you must ensure that you have
an accredited lab and can provide proof of the accreditation. Cooper prefers that
external labs be accredited to known lab accreditation standards such as A2LA and
ISO 17025.
1. Provide a copy of the lab company’s THIRD PARTY accreditation.
2. Results must be on company letterhead and includes:
The name of the Lab
Date of testing
Standards used for testing have to be identified.
Note: See below for more info on Lab accreditation standards
33
Hyperlink - More Information on A2LA:
A2LA The American Association for Laboratory Accreditation
Hyperlink - More information on ISO 17025:
ISO/IEC 17025:2005 - General requirements for the competence of
testing and calibration laboratories
Element 14 Appearance Approval Report
This requirement is used for more ‘print’ definition when a specification or print
reference does not exist. Appearance approvals can be used when a specific testing
to a known standard or in defining limit samples. This requirement should always be
in reference to a specific specification such as color, texture, contrast or paint.
It is not uncommon for projects that have no defined appearance requirements to
develop them throughout the course of development. This could be as simple as a
paint or color application that has developed into an appearance issue based on
Cooper feedback or Cooper’s customer feedback. Whenever appearance related
issues arise that have no defined specification it is in the best interest of both the
supplier and Cooper to utilize this element and clearly define what is acceptable and
what is not acceptable. When non-conformances arise appearance issues can be
readily resolved when there is clear definition of acceptance.
Element 15 Sample Parts
Sample Parts are to be included and are to be the actual samples measured in the
dimensional element-element 10. Sample parts should be delivered with or before
the submission. Each Cooper division has a different requirement for delivering
sample parts for PPAP
approval.
Contact either your Supplier
Quality representative or the
Quality Manager at the site
you are delivering parts to for
clarification on who should
receive the sample parts.
The default quantity for all
submissions is 3 parts unless
requested otherwise. Sample parts must reflect the print revision, the submission
data and be sampled from an actual production run.
Multicavity Parts: If the product you are providing comes from a multi-cavity tool
then Cooper’s requirement is that you provide 1 part from each cavity.
34
Instructions for Sample Parts Identification.
A minimum of 3 samples should be included with the PPAP submission. Contact
your Quality Manager or Supplier Quality Representative to determine the proper
department(s) to which to address the parts. Each sample part MUST be properly
tagged and identified as a PPAP sample part with information listed below. The box
that ships the parts should also be clearly labeled as containing Unapproved PPAP
Sample Parts in order to avoid being misplaced or inadvertently mixed with
approved production parts.
Your sample parts must contain the following information listed below at a minimum
or could possibly be rejected back for re-submission:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Identifying the part as a PPAP Sample Part
Include key information on the part label
Date of Manufacture
Cooper Part Number
Revision Level
Supplier Name
Name of Product (Optional)
Product Serial and Batch Number (Required if applicable)
Supplier Part and Type (Optional)
Approval markings (CL, UL, etc) where applicable
Quantity of Sample (Indicate Partial Shipments)
Procurement Contact, Purchasing Representative, etc
Element 16 Master Samples
Master Part Samples are required only when Level 5 PPAP is requested on a case
by case basis. Cooper Industries requires Master Part maintenance as 1 Master part
for every part number at the most recent revision level or part number. The Master
Part must be Must be maintained for the life of the product
Element 17 Checking Aids
Purpose: To provide evidence that the checking aids used to verify product exist
and have been properly validated.
There are many different types of checking aids. Examples of checking aids include
but are not limited to certified check fixtures, un-certified check fixtures, templates
and custom gauges.
35
Cooper requires the following for all checking aids:
9 Copy of a controlled print that documents the design of the checking aid
9 If the aid confirms form or fit, there should be a third party certification
9 Evidence that the checking aid has been verified as repeatable.
If a fixture is used to check physical print dimensions either in process or off line
then it is a checking aid. Checking aids must be documented through a formal
print and all additional verification data submitted with PPAP. You should review
the design of your checking aid with Cooper prior to building the check fixture to
avoid additional costs.
Checking aids must have evidence of the following submitted with the PPAP:
Conformance to the design print
Evidence of Repeatability in measuring the part
GRR studies for all CTQ related features
Element 18 Cooper Specific Requirements
Purpose: To address Cooper specific requirements during PPAP submission.
Element 18 of the PPAP process is reserved for Customer Specific requirements
and Cooper Industries has five designated Customer Specific requirements. Each
PPAP level requires a different combination of these specific requirements. The
customer specific requirements for Cooper Industries are:
9
9
9
9
9
Tooling Information Form
Packaging Form
IQC Inspection Plan (CES sourced product only)
Specification Deviation Form
Supplier PPAP Checklist
Additional documents are available on a case by case basis.
Cooper reserves the right to request any of these at the time of PPAP submission or
to request updates to these documents anytime during the life of the part. It is
important for suppliers to understand each of these requirements and why they are
important. We strongly recommend that you actively communicate with your Cooper
Industries representative to facilitate the completion of these specific requirements
prior to submitting your PPAP for approval.
36
Element 18a Tooling Form
Purpose: Document important information on all Cooper owned tools at the time of
production start-up.
This requirement is mandatory for all Cooper owned tools and must be completed by
the supplier prior to PPAP approval. Each division has different methods for identifying
tools and tracking them over time so each supplier should verify with their purchasing
representative what the Division process is for tool identification.
The Tooling Information form documents critical information including:
New or Modified Tooling
Cost Information
Dimensional Information
Capacity Information
Life Expectancy
Location of the Tool
It is critical that all information on the tooling form be filled out completely and for the
supplier to take the time to photograph the requested pictures and place them into the
tooling form. The tool used for production is owned by Cooper and documentation of the
tool is critical for future reference and comparison. The form consists of 2 sections. The
first seen below is for documenting technical information related to the tool. It is set up
in a worksheet format to assist with acquiring all of the information Cooper requires to
complete this document.
37
The second portion of the tooling form requests specific pictures of the front, back and
tool label required by each division.
Element 18b Packaging Form
Purpose: Approve the packaging method and material for supplied product.
Suppliers are required to provide packaging to Cooper facilities that:
Meet all facility related requirements
Ensures the prevention of shipping and handling defects
Addresses any Hazmat related concern
Below is the first page of the Packaging form. The top portion is basic technical
information. It is important that Cooper have a designated supplier contact
identified in this section for any packaging questions. The most important part of
the form is the pictures.
This portion of the form is very important and addresses the following issues:
1. Approval of the intended packaging material
2. Documentation of the intended packaging material
3. Weight and Dimensions of the finished part packaging
38
4. Pictures of the part, part container, dunnage and packing material
5. The final packaged product load delivered to Cooper
6. Package labeling.
The packaging form must be filled out in detail and all questions answered. It is
important that there be clear pictures of the packaging in all four areas specified:
1. A picture of the part in the packaging position
2. A picture of the outside container with label
3. A picture of any dunnage for the container
4. A picture of the final unit load in the shipping configuration
Element 18c IQC Inspection Form
Purpose: To plan and record all lot inspection requirements.
This requirement is only for suppliers sourced through Cooper Industries Asian
Sourcing Center (ASC). The inspection plan covers all planned inspection(s) for a
specific part for lot sampling and is included with all ASC submissions.
39
This document is only mandatory for ASC PPAP Submissions. Below is an example
of an IQC document.
Element 18d Specification Deviation Form
The Specification Deviation Form (SD) documents variations in products from the
initial specification, and the actions of the supplier regarding those variations. There
are three instances in which a Specification Deviation Form can be submitted:
1. Existing Production Deviation: When temporary out-of-tolerance parts
or out-of-control processes are encountered during manufacturing. The
SD Form will document the actions of the supplier in correcting the nonconformances.
Important: Many Cooper facilities require a temporary deviation
approval to utilize product with temporary issues or
nonconformance’s. The SD form is used only to notify Cooper of
the issue and your plan to resolve the issue. You may still be
required to receive approval via a temporary deviation at the
Cooper site that you supply. Contact the Quality Manager at the
Cooper Site you are supplying for additional clarification on the
sites requirement for temporary deviation. Submitting an SD form
to Cooper does not allow for shipment of nonconforming
product.
40
2. PPAP Submission: When documenting issues with the PPAP
requirements that are either viewed as not attainable or may require a
print change in order to approve the submission.
Important: It is the responsibility of the supplier to notify Cooper as
early as possible in the development process of issues with part
conformance to requirements. Issues that are documented only on
an SD form and that have not been communicated to Cooper prior
to PPAP submission will be treated as non-conformance. Do not
wait until PPAP submission to document and notify Cooper of
product issues.
3. Request Print Changes: When seeking a change to a part specification
to accommodate manufacturing variances or any long term
manufacturability issues via capability or test results.
A Specification Deviation form should be included any time a PPAP submittal is
made seeking approval of engineering changes to a part or product. Alternatively,
a Specification Deviation form should be included in a PPAP submittal as requested
by Cooper Industries in response to
Specification Deviation Form
production of nonconforming parts,
or identification of out-of-control
processes by a supplier. An SD
must be included to get interim
approval on a PPAP submission.
Existing Production Deviation
PPAP Submission
Check Here to Request Print Changes
Part Name
Part No:
Expiration Date
Drawing or Spec No.
Revision
Revision Date
Purchase order number
Initiated By
Maximum Units to be Deviated
Requirement Stated on Drawing or
Specification
Actual Observed Results or
Condition
Deviation from Specification to be
Allowed
If the supplier wishes a review of
engineering
specifications
to
accommodate
manufacturing
processes or manufacturability
concerns, they should fill out the
top part of form (parts 1-9).
Suppliers should note that if parts
are greatly out of specification or
tolerance, Cooper Industries will
most likely not accept the
nonconforming parts.
If the
supplier is reporting an out-of-control process or out-of-tolerance part that is to be
corrected, then the supplier should list whatever corrective action they have taken or
will take with Cooper’s consent.
Interim Action
Interim Action Status
Sort
Effect on Cost, Quality and/or Delivery
Choose One
Due Date
Corrective Action(s)
#
Action Item
Responsible Party
Due Date
Status
Element 18e Supplier Checklist
Purpose: To provide an organizational and communication tool for suppliers to
use when completing the PPAP Submission.
41
The Supplier PPAP Checklist is a useful tool. It provides a reference for what
elements are required by each level. It allows for assigning and delegating
responsibilities for each of the elements which often originate from different areas
within a supplier’s organization. And it allows for communication of issues.
PPAP
Submission Requirements
Supplier Checklist
Production Part Approval
Process
Part Description
Cooper Purchasing Rep.
Purchasing Rep Phone #
Cooper Part Number
Revision Level
Primary Manufacturing Site
Level 5
Level 4
Level 3
Important: Submit your
documents in this order.
Level 2
AIAG PPAP Fourth Edition
Level 1
Element
Order
PPAP Requirements
Required Documents
1
Part Submission
Warrant (PSW)
AR
Cooper PSW Required
2
Design Records &
Bubbled part print(s).
AR
TWO Cooper Divisional Parts
Prints
3
Approved Engineering
Change Documentation
AR
4
Customer Engineering
Approvals
AR
Assigned to
In
`
Various engineering
documentation
Not Required for Cooper
Submissions
Cooper Industries recommends that you utilize these documents to assist you
and to show that you have done the due diligence required by the PPAP process.
We recommend that as soon as your company is requested to supply a new part
to Cooper Industries, that you hold a cross functional meeting to discuss, assign
and target goals for completion of all the elements required. In this way you can
track and delegate the requirements across your company during the
development of the part. At the time of submission, the Supplier PPAP checklist
allows for two additional things.
1. Confirmation that the element is included (Check the “included” box)
2. Additional comments or concerns that would not be identified on a
Specification Deviation form as a non conformance but still need to be
brought to the attention of Cooper. This includes areas such as
packaging concerns, needed feedback from Cooper on specific issues
and additional information related to areas such as testing,
measurement and appearance etc..
Cooper Industries strongly encourages all suppliers to utilize this
document in preparing and submitting your PPAP.
42
Appendix A – Definitions
A–C
Actual Production Run
The production run that PPAP data is sampled from must be conducted using
production tooling, equipment, environment (including production operators), facility,
cycle time, etc. It should be performed once the supplier’s process is considered
ready for production.
Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP)
APQP is a framework of procedures and techniques used to develop products in
various industries. It was developed by AIAG for the automotive industry.
Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG)
AIAG (The Automotive Industry Action Group www.aiag.org) is a group based in
Southfield Michigan originally created to develop recommendations and a framework
for the improvement of quality in the American Automotive Industry.
Approved Status
Approved indicates that the part or material PPAP submission has been deemed
acceptable and will meet customer requirements.
Ballooned Drawings
A ballooned drawing shows the parts or assemblies in a part print with numbered
“balloons” that identifies individual dimensions and requirements of the part.
Capability Index
Process capability index is a statistical measure of product or process capability.
The ability of a process to produce output within specification limits. The concept of
process capability only holds meaning for processes that are in a state of statistical
control.
Certificate of Analysis (COA)
Certificate of Analysis (COA) normally is from an accredited lab that confirms the
material content meets a known standard. Material Test Results should be provided
in the form of a material composition report.
Certificate of Conformance (COC)
A certification of material/part that states the material/part meets the agreed upon
specification per customer requirements.
Checking Aids
Any tool, gage or assembly equipment that verifies the physical or performance
requirements of a part for the customer.
43
Control Plan
The Control Plan follows the PFMEA and Process Flow steps, and provides step by
step details on how the process is controlled to product specification and how to
respond to potential issues in the event of non-conformances.
C-E
Cp
This is the capability index which is defined as the tolerance width divided by the
process capability, irrespective of process centering.
Cpk
Cpk is an index that measures “process capability” and also accounts for process
centering. It “estimates” the capability that could be achieved over time assuming a
stable process. It looks at how close a process is running to its specification limits,
relative to the natural variability of the process. The larger the index, the less likely it
is that any item will be outside the specs. It uses a population estimator to calculate
the standard deviation and therefore “estimates” what the process is capable of
producing in the future. Cp measures straightforward process capability and Cpk
measures process capability as well as how close you are to your target and how
consistent you are around your average performance. Cpk should at a minimum be
1.33 or higher, 1.67 on CTQ requirements. It should be used in the short term for
estimating whether a process is capable of meeting customer requirements in the
future.
Critical To Quality (CTQ)
CTQ is the key measurable characteristic(s) of a product or process whose
performance standards or specification limits must be met in order to satisfy the
customer. These are typically the most important characteristics of the part design.
Each Cooper division defines CTQ differently. (See Appendix B)
Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA)
DFMEA is the application of the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis method
specifically to product design. It is an analytical method performed cross-functionally
and used in engineering to document and explore the ways that a product design
might fail in real-world use.
Design Record
A copy of the drawing or related specifications. If the customer is design responsible
this is a copy of customer drawing that is sent together with the Purchase Order
(PO). If supplier is design responsible this is a released drawing in supplier's release
system. Electronic parts often have several components of the “design record”
including part prints, gerber files and other related specifications.
44
Detection Rating
The rating scale utilized in FMEA to evaluate the ability of the current design or
process control to actually “detect” a failure mode based on the assessed testing
method and the quality of evidence.
Dimensional Results
A list of all dimensions or requirements identified on the ballooned drawing and
control plan. This list shows the product characteristics, specifications, measurement
results, measurement method or final disposition.
Electronic Submission
Electronic submission is the sending of files and the final PPAP submission
electronically to Cooper. Each division has a preferred method.
Elements
The 18 sections listed in the PPAP submission requirements. The elements of PPAP
submission depends on the required submission level.
Engineering Change Notice (ECN)
A customer approved document that shows the detailed description of the change.
Existing Part
A part currently made from a supplier used at a Cooper facility in production.
G-O
Gage R&R
Gauge R&R measures the amount of variability induced in measurements that
comes from the measurement system itself and compares it to the total variability
observed to determine the viability of the measurement system. A Gage R&R study
is used to determine the repeatability and reproducibility of a specific gage or
measurement device.
Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T)
Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing is used to define the nominal geometry of
parts and assemblies, to define the allowable variation in form and possibly size of
individual features, and to define the allowable variation between features.
Initial Process Studies
The purpose of initial process studies (CpK, Ppk) is to determine if the production
process is likely to manufacture product that will meet our requirements.
Interim Status
Interim approval permits shipment of material for production requirements on a
limited time or piece quantity basis.
45
Levels
Determine which of the 18 elements are required at the time of submission. Level 3
is the default submission unless you have prior agreement with Cooper.
Master Samples
A sample signed off by customer and supplier that are used to train operators on
subjective inspections such as visual or for noise. It documents the current revision
level of the product being manufactured.
Material Test Results
Specific requirements defined by Cooper that validates the design verification plan
and report and summarizes appropriate performance and functional test results.
Measurement System Analysis (MSA)
MSA usually contains the Gage R&R for the critical or high impact characteristics,
and a confirmation that gauges used to measure these characteristics are calibrated.
New Part
A part made from an approved, new or changed drawing that the current part
number or revision level has not been used in mass production.
Occurrence Rating
The rating scale utilized in FMEA that estimates how many times a potential failure
may occur.
Ongoing Requirements
Cooper’s supplier requirement to continually monitor product quality and the right to
request any information or data that confirms conformance of product. It is the
responsibility of the supplier to ensure that adequate proof of ongoing conformance
is performed and is available.
P–S
Part Submission Warrant (PSW)
This is the form that summarizes the whole PPAP package. This form shows the
reason for submission (design change, annual revalidation, etc) and the level of
documents submitted to the customer. If there are any deviations the supplier should
note on the warrant or inform the customer that PPAP cannot be submitted.
Performance Test Results
Performance Test Results covers all tests for a product, part or product materials
when performance or functional requirements are specified by the design record,
control plan or customer request.
46
Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
PPAP is used to establish confidence in component suppliers and their production
processes, by demonstrating that all customer engineering design records and
specification requirements are properly understood by the supplier. It validates that
the process has the potential to produce product consistently meeting these
requirements during an actual production run at the quoted production rate.
Pp
This is the performance index which is defined as the process width divided by the
process performance, irrespective of process centering.
Ppk
Ppk is an index (a simple number) that measures actual “process performance” or
whether the sample that you have generated from the process is capable of meeting
customer requirements. Ppk estimates total standard deviation by using individual
values and it tells you how the process has performed in the past. Pp measures
straightforward process performance and Ppk measures both process performance
and how close you are to the target value. It differs from process capability (Cp Cpk)
in that process performance only applies to a specific batch of material. It should be
used only for measuring the capability of past performance over the long term when
identifying issues and determining future improvement.
Process Failure Mode Effects Analysis (PFMEA)
The PFMEA follows the Process Flow steps and identifies potential modes of failure
during the fabrication and assembly of each component. The PFMEA is a living
document that serves to continuously address and reduce the potential of failure and
non-conforming product.
Process Flow Diagram
Process Flow Diagram is a process map in the form of a flow chart that outlines all
steps in the production process, including incoming components. In PPAP, it should
focus on the manufacturing process, including rework and repair.
Rejected Status
Used when a PPAP is determined to be unacceptable at the current part number or
revision level and typically requires re-submission for approval.
Risk Priority Number (RPN)
During an FMEA activity and after ranking the severity (S), occurrence (O) and
detection (D) an RPN number can be easily calculated by multiplying these 3
numbers together: RPN = Severity (S) x Occurrence (O) x Detection (D)
RPN Threshold
An RPN threshold is a specific number chosen as the point when action on a failure
mode is required. For example, if you have an RPN threshold of 50, then any failure
mode with an RPN value higher then 50 would require action on the right hand side
47
of the FMEA form. Cooper discourages against using arbitrary RPN thresholds and
encourages suppliers to improve the top 20%-30% of the highest RPN values
generated during the FMEA exercise.
S-T
Sample Parts
Sample parts are the parts delivered with the PPAP submission and should be the
same parts measured in the dimensional report. The default quantity is 3 parts for all
submissions unless there is a multi-cavity mold. For multi-cavity molded parts
suppliers need to provide 1 part per cavity.
Severity Rating
The rating scale utilized in FMEA to determine and estimate the “severity” of the
failure modes based on the functional requirements and their effects.
Specification Deviation
Document used to advise Cooper of nonconformance(s) on a PPAP submission,
and supplier requested corrective actions or suggestions.
Supplier Change Request (SCR)
This document is used for initiating all supplier changes through all Cooper divisions.
The SCR should not be used to suggest or initiate print related or temporary
changes.
Tooling
It is defined as the portion of process machinery which is specific to component or
sub-assembly. Tooling is used in process machinery to transform raw material into a
finished part or assembly. All Cooper owned tooling must have a tooling form
submitted with the PPAP submission.
Total Tolerance
In GR&R, the total tolerance calculation for overall Gage R&R % is the preferred
method instead of Total Variation.
48
Appendix B – Critical to Quality Characteristics (CTQ)
Critical Dimensions and Gage Checkpoints
C
Identifies features as CTQ on specifications or ballooned drawing. Supplier then
determines if CTQ belongs to one of the three following categories:
Process
P
Features that may vary during production are marked as Process CTQs. A GR&R
Study and Process Capability Analysis will likely be required on all Process CTQs.
First-Piece
F
Features that if verified at job start and job end will assure production to specification
are considered First Piece CTQs.
Safety Related
S
Features that affect the safe handling or operation of the part are considered
Safety CTQs. All safety CTQs will require a Process Capability Analysis, and
Cpk/Ppk indices must all be 1.67 or greater.
¾ A critical PART requirement specified on a controlling document (typically an
engineering drawing or specification)
¾ A critical PROCESS requirement identified by Customer or Supplier.
¾ Directly represents the safety, regulatory, or primary functional performance
requirements by the end customer or business
¾ Requires verification of part conformance during first production.
¾ Requires documented evidence of process control to maintain part conformance
through the life of the product
¾ Each CTQ shall be indicated by a stop sign (octagon) symbol
¾ The “n” inside the octagon refers to sequential number that
will be inserted based on how many CTQs are placed on
the print
N
49
For the remaining Cooper Industries Divisions you should
contact either your immediate Cooper Quality or Supplier
Quality representative for information or questions
regarding Critical to Quality Characteristics (CTQ).
50
Appendix C – Revision History
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Rev 1.0 – DRAFT- Initial Draft August 2008
Rev 2.0 – DRAFT September 3, 2008
Rev 3.0 – DRAFT November 14, 2008
Rev 4.0 – Draft – peer review – December 2, 2008
Rev 5.0 - Draft – peer feedback and definitions January 20, 2009
Rev 6.0 – Final Draft and release February 1, 2009
51